Valuation in an eminent domain case is necessarily accomplished through experts. In County Of Glenn vs. Patrick Foley (California Third Appellate District, case no. C068750, November 26, 2012), the Trial Court was reversed with directions. The trial court had excluded the property owner’s valuation expert, thus effectively eviscerating the property owner’s case.

The subject property was 400 acres of raw land. The appraiser concluded that the highest and best use of the land was for agricultural use as an orchard, such as for olives. The property owner’s appraiser identified seven comparable sales, all of which had already been developed as orchards. Using data from the University of California, cost adjustments were made to account for the difference between the raw land and a developed orchard. Additional qualitative adjustments were made, none of which the government authority disputed.

The Trial Court concluded it was inappropriate to compare raw land to orchard land, even with the adjustments that came from university studies. Accordingly, the Trial Court exercised its gatekeeper function and excluded the property owner’s appraisal expert. The Appellate Court concluded that, although expert testimony can be excluded if it provides no useful information or mere speculation, the jury was capable of evaluating the appraiser’s methods and conclusions. Consequently, the trial Court’s exclusion of the expert was in error.

David Nolte

I am a founding principal of Fulcrum Inquiry, an accounting and economic consulting firm that performs damage analysis for commercial litigation, forensic accountings, financial investigations, and business valuations. I am a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and an Accredited Senior Appraiser (ASA), as well as having other professional credentials. I regularly serve as an expert witness involving damages measurement. My litigation-oriented resume is on Fulcrum's website.

Permanent link to this article: https://betweenthenumbers.net/2012/12/california-appellate-court-criticizes-expert-witness-exclusion-in-eminent-domain-case/

Sponsor

Between the Numbers is sponsored by Fulcrum Inquiry. Fulcrum Inquiry is a consulting firm whose services include calculation of litigation damages and related expert testimony, forensic accounting, financial investigations, economic analysis, and business appraisals.

Thought for the Day

“Virtually nothing on earth can stop a person with a positive attitude who has his goal clearly in sight."

Comments Policy

All postings (including those associated with Fulcrum Inquiry) are the opinions of their respective authors, and do not necessarily reflect positions of Fulcrum Inquiry.

Anyone is allowed to post comments on any article; however, comments appear only following review. Advertisements not pertaining to the blog subject, spam (bot generated) comments, foul language, ad-hominem attacks, and immature behavior will not be approved.

Useful Links

The Lawyers Say….

All posts are copyrighted by Fulcrum Inquiry® as of their publication date

The authors and publishers are not intending to render legal, accounting, tax, or other professional advice. No client relationship is established from making general information available on this site, or from your making a comment or transmitting an email message to us. None of the information on this site should be used as a substitute for consultation with competent advisors that are able to consider the application of any general information to your specific situation.

While we have attempted to ensure that information contained on this site is reliable, we are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of such information. No guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness, or of the results obtained from the use of this information is provided.